Get picked by AI.
NAMEBEAM
Customer Zero. The Public Proof Ledger.
We sell getting picked by AI. So we test ourselves first, in public, and we publish the losses. This page is Namebeam's own AI-visibility check, run on Namebeam, using the same method we sell to customers. Every number here is dated. Every claim is sourced inline. A bad result gets the same size type as a good one.
Trends
As of 2026-09-02Layout feedback credit: a reader said the ledger was hard to follow. He was right. Trends now lead.
Record refreshed 2026-09-03 from corpus recount: 27 checks, 3 named, 1 void, 23 not named.
Corpus growth over time
Cumulative checks logged, all businesses and engines
Source: citation_corpus.csv, all logged rows (391 total, every business and engine in the file). Range 2026-07-29 to 2026-09-02.
Every customer-zero check, one dot each
Twenty-seven dated checks of Namebeam on the engines. Filled gold = Namebeam named. Hollow = not named. Dashed = check logged void, counted as neither.
Twenty-seven dated checks of Namebeam on the engines. Filled gold = Namebeam named. Hollow = not named. Dashed = check logged void, counted as neither. Three namings on record: Copilot on 2026-08-01 (flagged, the session showed personalization and is not banked as a clean signal), Grok on 2026-09-01 (a direct brand-recall prompt, and Grok's own answer flagged Namebeam as unestablished), and Perplexity on 2026-09-02 (a category buyer-intent prompt, unprompted and unflagged, the first clean naming on this ledger). One check, 2026-08-24, logged void. The other twenty-three checks came back not named. CORRECTED 2026-08-24: an earlier version of this chart showed a 100 percent point on 2026-08-22 from a malformed corpus row; the true result that day was not named, and this dot chart replaced the rate line the same night a reader called the shape misleading. Both corrections are the receipt.
Dated
Every number on this page carries the date it was pulled. No undated claims, ever.
Sourced
Every claim links to where it came from, or is logged as a first-party test with the query shown.
Ongoing
This page updates as each engine check finishes, not after the results look good. Pending is pending.
Why This Page Exists
Namebeam's product is helping a business get named when someone asks an AI a buying question. Before we sell that to anyone else, we run the check on ourselves and publish exactly what came back, including the parts that do not flatter us.
Where things stand, 2026-07-31: five of five engines checked, five misses, each published the same day it was run.
Want this same check run on your business?
We ask all five engines the same dated question about your business and email you the raw transcripts, unedited, good or bad. Free. No card, no signup, no catch.
Free 5-Engine Check
I ask the AI engines your buyer's question and email you the dated transcripts, free.
Form not loading? Open it in a new tab or email [email protected] with your business name, city, and what you do.
Form not loading? Email [email protected] with your business name, city, and what you do.
Receipt 001, Dated 2026-07-24
The Founding Receipt: Gemini Did Not Name Us
The test that started this page. One real buyer-intent question, asked of one AI engine, logged the day we asked it.
Query: honest, unbiased sources for tracking crypto and money scams
MissWhat we asked: which sources are honest and unbiased for tracking crypto and money scams, with dated receipts, not marketing copy.
What Gemini named:
- Molly White
- ZachXBT
- Arkham Intelligence
- CourtListener / RECAP
- REKT Database
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-07-24. This is one query on one engine, not a statistical sample. The exact method is in the "Method" section below. Ask an AI engine the same kind of question yourself and see what it names.
Receipt 002, Dated 2026-07-22
The AEO Scorecard: Zero Backlinks, Zero Index
Two days before the Gemini check, we ran the technical half of the audit: how visible is namebeam.ai to search engines and AI crawlers, mechanically, before any AI model even gets asked a question.
| Property | Domain Rating (Ahrefs) | Grade | Indexed pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| namebeam.ai | 0.0 | 8/100 | 0 |
| thereceiptsindex.com | 3.6 | 14/100 | not part of this pull |
Both rows pulled 2026-07-22. Domain Rating (DR) is an Ahrefs metric, scored 0 to 100, estimating how much a site's backlink profile would help it compete in search. Grade is Namebeam's own composite score from the same audit pass, combining backlink signal and search index presence.
site:namebeam.ai into Google on 2026-07-22, nothing would have come back. Not a low
ranking. Nothing. A Domain Rating of 0.0 means Ahrefs found effectively no other websites linking in.
Both numbers are dated because they move. We will re-pull and re-print them as they change.Receipt 003, Dated 2026-07-30
Perplexity Did Not Name Us Either
The second engine check. One real buyer-intent question, asked of Perplexity, logged the day we asked it.
Query: what service can I use to check if AI assistants recommend my business
MissWhat we asked: "What service can I use to check if AI assistants like ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity recommend my business?"
What Perplexity named:
- CheckMyAI
- Mangools
- SpyFu
- xfunnel.ai
- Peec AI
- "Am I On AI?"
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-07-30. This is one query on one engine, not a statistical sample. The exact method is in the "Method" section below.
Receipt 004, Dated 2026-07-30
Google and AI Search: Two Queries, Zero Namebeam
Two real queries, run against Google web search and the AI Overview surface (the AI-generated summary panel Google shows above search results), logged the same day as the Perplexity check.
Query 1: service to check if AI chatbots recommend my business
MissWhat we asked: a buyer-intent search for a service to check if AI chatbots recommend a business.
What surfaced instead:
- Whito
- Greenlight Systems
- NEO360
- RMCM
- GoBig Systems
- Lesli Rose
- Indexed
- Tallal Technologies
Query 2: a near-branded search for our own category
MissWhat we asked: a near-branded query for our own category, the kind of search where a company should have its best shot at showing up.
What surfaced instead:
- Ahrefs
- Birdeye
- Semrush
- Loamly
- Omnia
Logged from first-party test runs on 2026-07-30. These are two queries on one search surface, not a statistical sample. The exact method is in the "Method" section below.
Receipt 005, Dated 2026-07-30
ChatGPT Did Not Name Us Either
The fourth engine check. One real buyer-intent question, asked of ChatGPT while logged in on the free tier, logged the day we asked it.
Query: what service can I use to check if AI assistants recommend my business
MissWhat we asked: "What service can I use to check if AI assistants like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity recommend my business? Give me specific product or company names."
What ChatGPT named:
- Profound
- Peec AI
- Otterly AI
- Semrush
- Conductor
- Athena HQ
- Scrunch AI
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-07-30. This is one query on one engine, not a statistical sample. The exact method is in the "Method" section below.
The Five-Engine Check
Status: 5 of 5 Engines Run
Namebeam's full check covers five AI engines: ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI (the AI Overviews shown inside Google Search). As of 2026-07-31, all five engines have been run: ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Google AI, and Claude. Each one published here, win or loss, the day it ran. Nothing gets held back for a better result.
ChatGPT
Run 2026-07-30
Result: miss. Namebeam was not named. Full receipt above.
Claude
Run 2026-07-31
Result: miss. Namebeam was not named. Claude pointed to Semrush, Birdeye, SE Ranking, Finseo, PromptRush, and search-visibility.ai instead. Run by the founder by hand, logged the same day.
Perplexity
Run 2026-07-30
Result: miss. Namebeam was not named. Full receipt above.
Gemini (Flash)
Run 2026-07-24
Result: miss. Namebeam was not named. Full receipt above.
Google AI
Run 2026-07-30
Result: miss. Namebeam did not surface in either query. Full receipt above.
"Pending" means scheduled and not yet run, not run and hidden. This is not a completed five-engine result. It is four dated receipts out of five, shown honestly as four out of five.
Receipt 006, Dated 2026-08-01 to 2026-08-02
Round Two: Five Engines Checked Again, Two Named Us
The second full round of the same customer-zero check, run the night of 2026-08-01 into 2026-08-02 UTC. Same method, same three buyer-intent prompts per engine, this round covering ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Copilot, and Google AI. Claude was not part of this round; Copilot stood in its place.
Where things stand, 2026-08-01/02: 2 of 5 engines named Namebeam on the direct brand-recall prompt, "What is Namebeam?" (Perplexity, Copilot). 1 of 5 named it on the category prompts too, all 3 of 3 (Copilot only). 2 of 5 named nothing across all 3 prompts (Gemini, Google AI). 1 of 5 could not be reached at all (ChatGPT). The record moved off the 2026-07-31 zero, and the mechanism behind each named result is documented below. One of the two named results is flagged and not banked as a clean signal. Nothing more is claimed than that.
Update, 2026-09-03: the corpus now holds 391 logged rows and 27 customer-zero checks through 2026-09-02. The scoreboard changed: three namings on record, in order. Copilot named Namebeam on 2026-08-01 (flagged, the session showed personalization, not banked as a clean signal). Thirteen straight checks on 2026-08-22 through 2026-08-25 came back not named, after that first naming, not before it, correcting an earlier version of this page that printed the order backwards. Grok named Namebeam on 2026-09-01, a direct brand-recall prompt that Grok's own answer flagged as unestablished. Perplexity named Namebeam on 2026-09-02, a category buyer-intent prompt, unprompted and unflagged, the first clean naming on this ledger. One check, 2026-08-24, logged void. The other twenty-three checks came back not named. The most recent check on record is itself a named result, so there is no current miss streak to report. That is the number, printed at full size, and the checks keep running.
Perplexity Named Namebeam, Sourced From Our Own Receipts Post
NamedWhat we asked: three prompts this round, a category question about checking AI visibility (asked two different ways) and a direct brand-recall question, "What is Namebeam?"
What Perplexity named on the category prompts:
- Otterly.ai
- Peec AI
- Keyword.com
- Profound
- RightResponse AI
Named: Namebeam, on the direct brand-recall prompt only. Perplexity's answer cited two of Namebeam's own Facebook posts about the 2026-07-31 zero-of-five result as its leading sources, alongside general AI-visibility roundup articles.
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-08-01. This is one engine across three prompts, not a statistical sample. Full transcript and all sources cited are in the corpus file linked below.
Copilot Named Namebeam 3 of 3, Flagged and Not Banked
Named 3/3Flagged, Not BankedWhat we asked: the same three prompts, two category questions and the direct brand-recall question, "What is Namebeam?"
Named: Namebeam, on all three prompts this round, including a first-position recommendation on the category prompts, ahead of named competitors Pleiades Consultancy, Signal Digital, and VisibAI.
Flag, not banked: every Copilot answer this round showed personalization. The session greeted "Terry" by name on every screen, and the brand-recall answer named Terry Carter's other ventures, Trunkline and Receipts Index, unprompted, calling Namebeam "a critical node" in "your ecosystem." This is not a cold, anonymous-consumer signal. We are not counting this 3 of 3 as a clean win until it repeats in a logged-out or fresh-account session.
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-08-01. This is one engine across three prompts, not a statistical sample. Full transcript is in the corpus file linked below.
Gemini: Zero of Three, Clean Miss
MissWhat we asked: the same three prompts, two category questions and the direct brand-recall question, "What is Namebeam?"
What Gemini named instead:
- HubSpot's AEO Grader
- LeadLocal SEO AI Visibility Checker
- Otterly.ai
- Profound
- Rush Analytics AI Tracker
- Yext / Cheers
Logged from a first-party test run on 2026-08-01. This is one engine across three prompts, not a statistical sample. Full transcript is in the corpus file linked below.
Google AI Overview: Zero of Three, Suggested Northbeam and Beam Therapeutics Instead
MissWhat we asked: the same three prompts, two category questions and the direct brand-recall question, "What is Namebeam?"
Logged from first-party test runs on 2026-08-01, verified by full-page screenshot in addition to text extraction. This is one search surface across three prompts, not a statistical sample. Full transcript is in the corpus file linked below.
ChatGPT: Not Reachable This Round
Not ReachableWhat we attempted: the same three prompts. The composer would not submit any of them across three separate attempts, including a reload-and-retry in the original tab and a brand-new tab and session. Clicking Send or pressing Enter never produced a response; the page stayed on the empty composer screen every time, and one screenshot attempt timed out with the renderer reported as frozen or unresponsive.
Logged, not scored: per the two-attempts-max rule, ChatGPT was logged as not reachable and skipped for all three prompts this round. No answer was captured, so no score is counted here, up or down.
Logged from first-party attempts on 2026-08-01. This is a technical limitation for this round, not a statistical sample and not a scored result.
The complete 15-row dataset behind this round, including full verbatim answers and every source cited, is published in the corpus file for this round: NB-CZ_check_round_20260801_night.json. Three prompts per engine, one run per prompt, not a statistical sample. The exact method is in the Method section below.
Method
How We Run This Check
The same method we run for Namebeam, we run for every customer. No customer gets a softer version.
Buyer-intent queries
We define real questions a buyer would actually type or ask an AI assistant, not keywords chosen to make the numbers look good.
Live engine runs
We run each query live, on the actual engine, and log the raw answer as it came back, not a cached or simulated version.
Site crawl
We check robots.txt (the file that tells crawlers what they may access), the sitemap (the file listing a site's pages for search engines), and llms.txt (a newer file some sites publish for AI crawlers specifically).
Index check
We run a site: search on Google to see how many pages of the property are actually
inside Google's index, not just published on the web.
Domain Rating pull
We pull Domain Rating from Ahrefs, a 0 to 100 estimate of how much a site's backlink profile would help it compete in search.
Dated, disconfirming-first
Every result is dated the day we pulled it. We look for reasons a result might be wrong or unflattering before we look for reasons it is right.
If the method would embarrass a customer, we run it on ourselves first.
What Happens Next
The Record Is Complete
Claude ran on 2026-07-31, on the same category question used for the ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, and Google AI checks. Miss. Five engines run, five engines published.
The five-engine record is complete: every engine logged the day it ran, badge and all. We did not wait for a good month to run a bad engine, and we did not pull a scheduled check because the last one stung. The weekly sensor keeps re-checking from here. If a future run shows Namebeam getting named somewhere, that win prints in the same size type as these losses. If it does not, that stays up too. The machine readable record lives in the public corpus on GitHub.
You read the whole record. Now get yours.
Same method, same five engines, dated the day we run it. We email you the raw transcripts whatever they say.
Free 5-Engine Check
I ask the AI engines your buyer's question and email you the dated transcripts, free.
Form not loading? Open it in a new tab or email [email protected] with your business name, city, and what you do.
Form not loading? Email [email protected] with your business name, city, and what you do.